[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 18 (Thursday, February 24, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S759-S760]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                              NOMINATIONS

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am very pleased the Senate voted 98-0 on 
Kermit Bye to be United States Circuit Court Judge for the Eighth 
Circuit and Justice George Daniels to be United States District Court 
Judge for the Southern District of New York.
  Kermit Bye is an outstanding attorney from North Dakota. I will put 
his full record in the Record later. Justice Daniels is a distinguished 
New Yorker, with the strong support of the two distinguished Senators 
from New York--Senators Moynihan and Schumer--in the same way Kermit 
Bye had the strong support of the two distinguished Senators from North 
Dakota--Senators Conrad and Dorgan.
  I wish to thank both the Republican leader and the Democratic leader 
for helping us get these nominations up. They had been reported last 
year. For some inexplicable reason, they were held up. We see that the 
Senate, in voting on them, has voted 98-0. I mention this because many 
times we have judges, who are judicial nominations, where it takes a 
long time to get their nominations to the floor, and then they are 
passed by overwhelming margins. Out of a sense of justice towards the 
people we are putting on our Federal courts, we, the Senate, should do 
a better job.
  Many wait too long. The most prominent current examples of that 
treatment are Judge Richard Paez and Marsha Berzon. We have waited too 
long to vote on them. I understand, finally, after 4 years, we are 
going to vote on Judge Paez, who has one of the most distinguished 
records anybody has ever had who has come before the Senate. He is 
strongly supported by law enforcement, strongly supported by the bar, 
strongly supported by the Hispanic community. He is certainly proud of 
his Hispanic background, as well he should be. He has accomplished more 
than most people accomplish of any background. I hope that after 4 
years he will be voted on.
  Finally, I had hoped we would reach a vote on Timothy Dyk today. He 
was first nominated to a vacancy in the Federal Circuit in April of 
1998. For anybody who is keeping track, that was well in the last 
century. After having a hearing and being reported favorably by the 
Judiciary Committee to the Senate in September of 1998, his nomination 
was left on the Senate calendar without action and then returned to the 
President 2 years ago as the 105th Congress adjourned. He was 
renominated in January 1999 and reported favorably in October 1999.
  So he has been waiting for all these years. He has clerked for three 
Supreme Court Justices, including the Chief Justice. He has a 
remarkably distinguished career. He has represented people across the 
spectrum, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which strongly backs 
him. I hope we can get him confirmed this week or next. They need him 
on the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. He is one of the most 
qualified people we have ever seen. We should do it.
  Mr. Dyk has distinguished himself with a long career of private 
practice in the District of Columbia. From 1964 to 1990, he worked with 
Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering as an associate and then as a partner. Since 
1990, he has been with Jones Day Reavis & Pogue as a partner and Chair 
of its Issues and Appeals Section.
  Mr. Dyk received his undergraduate degree in 1958 from Harvard 
College, and his law degree from Harvard Law School in 1961. Following 
law school, he clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justices Reed, Burton, 
and Chief Justice Warren. Mr. Dyk was also a Special Assistant to the 
Assistant Attorney General in the Tax Division. His has been a 
distinguished career in which he has represented a wide array of 
clients, including the United States Chamber of Commerce. I look 
forward to the confirmation vote on this highly-qualified nominee.
  Kermit Bye is an outstanding attorney from North Dakota. From 1962 to 
1966, Mr. Bye was the Deputy Securities Commissioner and Special 
Assistant Attorney General for the State of North Dakota. And from 1966 
to 1968, he was an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the District of North 
Dakota. Since 1968, he has been a member and partner with the Fargo law 
firm of Votel, Kelly, Knutson, Weir, Bye & Hunke, Ltd. Mr. Bye received 
his undergraduate degree in 1959 from the University of North Dakota, 
and his law degree from the University of North Dakota Law School in 
1962.
  Mr. Bye's nomination is another of those that was favorably reported 
last year by the Judiciary Committee but which was not acted upon by 
the Senate. He is strongly supported by Senator Dorgan and Senator 
Conrad, who are to be commended for their efforts on his behalf and on 
behalf of the people of North Dakota that has finally brought us to 
this day.
  Justice George Daniels is a distinguished New Yorker. He has 
distinguished himself with a long career of service in the New York 
federal and state court systems. He was an Assistant U.S. Attorney in 
the Eastern District of New York from 1983 to 1989. From 1989 to 1990, 
and again from 1993 to 1995, he was a Judge in the Criminal Court of 
the City of New York. And from 1990 to 1993, he was a counsel to the 
Mayor of the City of New York. Since 1995, Mr. Daniels has been a 
Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
  Justice Daniels received his undergraduate degree in 1975 from Yale 
University, and his law degree from the University of California at 
Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law in 1978.
  He has the strong support of Senator Moynihan and Senator Schumer and 
the ABA has given him its highest rating. Although he was reported 
favorably by the Judiciary Committee last year, his was one of the 
nominations not acted upon by the Senate. I congratulate the Senators 
from New York and Justice Daniels and his family on his consideration 
today.
  I thank the majority leader and commend the Democratic leader for 
scheduling the consideration of these judicial nominations. The debate 
on judicial nominations over the last couple of years has included too 
much delay with respect to too many nominations.
  The most prominent current examples of that treatment are Judge 
Richard Paez and Marsha Berzon. With respect to these nominations, the 
Senate has for too long refused to do its constitutional duty and vote. 
I am grateful that the majority leader agreed last year to bring each 
of those nominations to a Senate vote before March 15. Nominees deserve 
to be treated with dignity and dispatch--not delayed for two or three 
or four years. The nomination of Judge Paez has now been pending for 
over four years. He has the strong support of his home State Senators 
and of local law enforcement.
  His has been a distinguished career in which he has served as a state 
and federal judge for what is now approaching 19 years. His story is a 
wonderful American story of hard work, fairness and public service. He 
and his family have much of which to be proud. Hispanic organizations 
from California and around the country have urged the Senate to act 
favorably on his nomination without further delay.
  Within the next two weeks the Senate will be called upon to vote on 
this outstanding nomination, and I trust that we will do the right 
thing. I recall when Judge Sonia Sotomayor, another outstanding 
District Court Judge, was nominated to the Second Circuit and her 
nomination was delayed. Reportedly, she was so well qualified that some 
feared her quick confirmation might have led her to be considered as a 
possible Supreme Court nomination and that was why Senate consideration 
of her nomination was delayed through secret holds. Ultimately, she was 
confirmed to the Second Circuit.
  After all the delay in that case, I was struck that not a single 
Senator who voted against her confirmation and not a single Senator who 
had acted to delay its consideration uttered a single word to justify 
such opposition.
  Of course it is every Senator's right to vote as he or she sees fit 
on all matters. But I would hope that in the case of Judge Richard 
Paez, where his nomination has been delayed for over four years, for 
the longest period in the history of the Senate, those who have opposed 
him will show him the courtesy of using this time to discuss with us 
any concerns that may have and to explain the basis for any negative 
vote against a person so well qualified for the position to which he 
has been nominated by the President.
  Mr. DORGAN. Will the Senator yield?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.

[[Page S760]]

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senator be 
recognized for an additional 30 seconds.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LEAHY. I yield to the Senator.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I am so pleased that the Senate has 
confirmed Kermit Bye's nomination to the Eighth Circuit Court of 
Appeals.
  Kermit Bye is one of North Dakota's most distinguished and respected 
attorneys, and a senior partner in one of the top law firms in the 
Midwest. He has nearly 40 years of trial and appellate experience, he 
was President of the North Dakota Bar Association, and he's received 
the North Dakota State Bar Association's Distinguished Service Award.
  I won't name every civic and community organization that Kermit Bye 
has chaired and served on, because the list is too long. Instead, I 
will say Kermit Bye cares deeply about the law and about the people our 
laws protect.
  He is a man of impeccable integrity and sound judgment, possessing a 
formidable intellect and a healthy dose of North Dakota common sense. 
Kermit is temperamentally very well-suited for the bench, and can be 
counted on as a fair-minded jurist who understands the importance of 
the rule of law to society, and the judiciary's proper role within our 
constitutional system.
  As many will recall, this seat on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals 
was first vacated in April 1997, and my fellow North Dakotan John Kelly 
was nominated and confirmed to this seat last summer. Tragically, just 
a few weeks after taking his oath, Judge Kelly took ill and passed 
away.
  I am pleased today that Kermit Bye has been confirmed to fill this 
vacancy so that our Federal judiciary can benefit from his wisdom and 
judgment.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to commend the majority leader, 
Senator Lott, for proceeding today with votes for these judicial 
nominees. As I have stated, we will continue to process the 
confirmations of nominees who are qualified to be federal judges. In 
that respect, the Senate Judiciary Committee held its first nominations 
hearing of this Session on Tuesday, February 22, and I expect to see 
more judicial nominees moving through the process in the coming months. 
There is a perception held by some that the confirmation of judges 
stops in election years. This perception is inaccurate, and I intend to 
move qualified nominees through the process during this session of 
Congress.
  That said, in moving forward with the confirmations of judicial 
nominees, we must be mindful of problems we have with certain courts, 
particularly the Ninth Circuit. It was reported yesterday that the 
Ninth Circuit has a record of 0-6 this supreme court term. In addition, 
the President must be mindful of the problems he creates when he 
nominates individuals who do not have the support of their home-State 
Senators. In this regard, I must say that it appears at times as if the 
President is seeking a confrontation with the Senate on this issue, 
instead of working with the Senate to see that his nominees are 
confirmed.
  During this Congress, despite partisan rhetoric, the Judiciary 
Committee has reported 42 judicial nominees, and the full Senate has 
confirmed 36 of these--a number comparable to the average of 39 
confirmations for the first sessions of the past five Congresses when 
vacancy rates were generally much higher. In total, the Senate has 
confirmed 340 of President Clinton's judicial nominees since he took 
office in 1993.
  I am disturbed by some of the allegations that have been made that 
the Senate's treatment of certain nominees differed based on their race 
or gender. Such allegations are entirely without merit. For 
noncontroversial nominees who were confirmed in 1997 and 1998, there is 
little if any difference between the timing of confirmation for 
minority nominees and non-minority nominees. Only when the President 
appoints a controversial female or minority nominee does a disparity 
arise. Moreover, last session, over 50% of the nominees that the 
Judiciary Committee reported to the full Senate were women and 
minorities. Even the former Democratic chairman of the Judiciary 
Committee, Senator Joe Biden, stated publicly that the process by which 
the committee, under my chairmanship, examines and approves judicial 
nominees ``has not a single thing to do with gender or race.'' That is 
from the transcript of a Judiciary Committee hearing on judicial 
nominations on November 10, 1999.
  The Senate has conducted the confirmations process in a fair and 
principled manner, and the process has worked well. The Federal 
Judiciary is sufficiently staffed to perform its function under article 
III of the Constitution. Senator Lott, and the Senate as a whole, are 
to be commended.

                          ____________________